With the recent spate of gun violence still weighing heavily on the minds of many Americans, violence in videogames has again been thrust into the national spotlight. Many feel that violent videogames are turning children into potential killers by desensitizing them to the horrors of death and violence. While I don't have empirical evidence to counter or support this argument, I do wonder why videogames alone are targeted as the main instigator of this so-called "culture of violence" we find ourselves in.

What seems to be escaping everyone is that violence is ingrained in virtually every form of entertainment in mainstream American media. From TV to radio, violence has become nothing but an afterthought. Yet, not once since any of these recent shootings have occurred has anyone blamed anything but videogames. Our local television stations, movies, and books all are infused with an equal if not greater level of violence and no one thinks anything of it. This is a disturbing trend that needs greater thought.

Pre-teen and teen girls line up to watch the latest Twilight, a PG-13 movie, and were treated to the sight of heads being torn off. CSI regularly showcases grizzled, mutilated bodies. Even Harry Potter features a description of dismemberment in its pages. Though none of these examples are as "interactive" as a videogame, they are still examples of graphic violence in mainstream media that no one seems to question. Frankly, a lot of the violence in mainstream media can be more visceral and gory than what an M-rated game portrays. The same demographic feared to be playing M-rated, violent games is ingesting the same sort of content across other forms of media, so why aren't we discussing the impact of these, as well?

What I find even odder is that people condemn games like Assassin's Creed or Call of Duty, yet movies like Django Unchained go on to get Oscar nominations. All three are home to persistent violence, yet Django, because it's a movie, is treated with respect, despite the fact it is easily more gratuitous and gory than either of the two games I mentioned. I find this an exceptionally unfair double-standard, as titles like Assassin's Creed don't even remotely relish in the sort of violence Django embraced. What makes one better than the other? It seems totally arbitrary.

Dig a little deeper and it becomes clear that the stigma perhaps stems from the fact that Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty are called video "games". With a strong history of ties to children's entertainment, it's understandable that violent games have the stigma that they do, as people haven't moved past the notion that videogames are not the same thing they were when Pong debuted. Ignorance to change is no excuse, however, and particularly when it comes to parents.What is perhaps the most astounding thing about this debate to me is the number of parents who willing give M-rated games to their children. Every game box has a rating, and even if you don't know what each letter means, there is a description explaining them on the back. Why so many parents think themselves above reading these descriptors and then having the audacity to blame everyone else for their poor decision making is beyond me.

What's more, given the general cost of videogames, of all forms of media they should be the hardest thing for a kid to get their hands on. Just about any kid under the age of 12 is completely dependent upon their parent for income and transport. Yet it's totally commonplace to hear a six-year old on Call of Duty yelling racial slurs at people. This disconnect between parental responsibility and what children do or do not have access to is glaring and inexcusable. Coupled with the seeming inability of people to perceive the casual depictions of violence across virtually every form of mass media, and I think we have a giant mess that goes far beyond Halo or Assassin's Creed. I think that the videogame industry deserves as much creative freedom as we give to our writers and directors. If violence is truly the pervasive problem we're being told it is, it needs to be acknowledged across the board.